I was wondering where I'd seen this "squarish" design before. Now I know
I was wondering where I'd seen this "squarish" design before. Now I know
I don't care what gear I have.
Things I sell: http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/413...html?rid=611056 Member(s) liked this post
Exciting-looking camera...love the look of these manual controls, EVF, weather-sealing, tilt LCD, sturdy metal build, absence of AA filter, and promise of fast auto-focus!
Now as far as its use for occasional street photography, does anyone know if the shutter can be set to silent mode?
Review and samples here:-
First Look: Fujifilm X-T1 | Fuji Rumors
1 Member(s) liked this post
Good Catch on the Contax RTS, I had totally forgotten that one.
Good looking camera indeed, would have liked a bit more resolution, but it's going to stay at 16 for a while.
Love the new EVF features, especially the vertical info rotate.
Tiltable screen really nice also.
New top end iso of 51K, which makes me wonder if the lower sensitivities will be better, 1600 to 3200. Still seems to have a base iso of 200 for raw, would love to see 100 there.
Noticed a built in interval timer, but I am sure like all the other cameras that have one, you will be limited to 30" exposures.
Looks like the microphone port has all the camera remote programing that the X-E2 had so you should be able to use an external intervalometer there.
Good looking camera.
Question is why did they do way with the threaded cable release? I use that extensively with my other X cameras and is a reassuring feature in the field.
In a way, the "retro" aspect of these new cameras are rather overblown. Until the early 200s, there were several cameras that were designed like this. The Contax N1 was launched as late as 2001, with the digital version shortly after.
I quite like the design and shape of the new XT1. Also the EVF seems to be a good improvement towards coming closer to an original EVF.
What I am a bit disappointed is the still 16MP. I know and I hear all the arguments for this. But hey, in the smaller m43 EM1 we can get 16MP at great quality, so something like 20 or 24MP would just have been possible for sure in the XTRANS sensor. I think Fuji strategy is to see this one for the XPro2.
Last edited by ptomsu; 28th January 2014 at 11:32.
Any word on delivery date in the US?
It's a near dead ringer for the Contax RTS, one of my all time favorite camera bodies.
This is pretty exciting. Also neat that most of the rumored specs were dead on.
I was debating a few upgrades for my personal shooting of my Panasonic Micro 4/3 gear this year. I was debating a GH3 or a GX7. And even a GM1 kit as an every day carry camera.
I still use my Nikon gear for most of my "serious" paid work. Especially when I need 8fps or the low light abilities. And since I already have all of that fast and long reach glass already. Anything that is web/online only, I'm happy to take out my Panasonics and shoot with them.
I may hold off on that, and keep my IR Panasonic bodies, lenses and GH2 for video work and get one of these for walk around stuff. Or convert my other Panasonic bodies to different IR spectrums!
I had been debating an X100/X100s anyways as a daily carry. This will certainly be smaller, and more versatile with adapting legacy glass or using any of the other excellent Fuji lenses.
I am kind of scared to see what the Canadian retail will be. If it's $1,300/1,700 US Body only/18-55 Kit, then it may be $1,599+/1,999+CDN here for the same combo. I would also hope that they'd offer kits with some of the primes too. I think the 18mm is the one I want the most to start with.
For me, three pluses over the XE-2 and one negative and one still missing:
Better view finder
Missing IBIS (I know, I know, but one can wish as I shoot old manual lenses a lot)
Negative is the silly lock on the ISO dial. Sigh. Retro for no reason. Frankly, the one retro control I could do without is the ISO dial. But to make it locking and not easily changeable with the camera to your eye is just plain silly. ISO needs to be just as easily settable as aperture and shutter speed.
Definitely and interesting camera... Personally, I'd have to choose to switch form m4/3. Same sensor as the XE-2 which I played with for a week is a big plus. The tilt screen is a huge add IMO. The view finder on the XE-2 was sweet, so this one must be crazy good :-).
For me, the X-E2 does what I purchased it for, but once my lens kit is established I can see an X-T1 in my future as a second body… perhaps. I'm not really hungry for a compact DSLR form factor , but I do like the feature set of the new body. The viewfinder and weather sealing are very attractive – among other things – plus I love the locking dials.
 I've never really like the ergonomics or balance of compact DSLRs, and generally prefer larger bodies (like 5DIII or Series 1) for the the lenses I use, but with a set of compact lenses it is quite attractive.
This body I am very much looking forward to seeing in my hands. If the video improvements and the continuous focus tracking works well this could become a primary Photojournalist tool in a lot smaller, lighter kit.
Flickr1 Member(s) liked this post
The X-T1 is next for me to review and may end up being a keeper. The optically stabilized lenses rock - the 18-55mm was stellar and the 18-135mm may be the perfect travel lens. I just wish they would release it with the camera. Control locks just take a little getting used to. I automatically lock/unlock the controls on my E-M1 (on sale now) without thinking about it.
We're talking about a camera manufacturer that is still thriving with film, cameras as well as the stuff you put in them, that recently launched a new instant film camera and sells it by the millions and that is known to move towards the current in most ways. The files from the Fuji cameras are among the best, most beautiful and most workable files from any camera, the Nikon D4/Df included. They have many good reasons to move slowly, the love of photography probably being the most important.
I don't care what gear I have.
Things I sell: http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/413...html?rid=611052 Member(s) liked this post
I believe that you are right about Fuji. Here is a company that hasn't gone the way of Kodak, still produces film, still produces film cameras, produces digital cameras that seem to be designed by photographers and are not afraid or arrogant enough to not update their camera capabilities with firmware releases. I like Fuji - they listen and if there's a problem they will fix or improve the platform on an on-going basis. Heck, even the lenses are top notch and second to nobody.
Interestingly when I think about it, I have more Fuji cameras than any other manufacturer:
Hasselblad XPan II (Fuji TX2)
(previously also X100 & X100s)
and I fully intend to pick up the X-T1 when they have some bundles available (or thin my X herd). I really think that Fuji 'get it' and are doing things right.
Am I concerned about 16mp? Not in the slightest. I would wager that most people have way more megapixels than they know what to do with, other than to pixel peep. (Me too!)
Last edited by GrahamWelland; 29th January 2014 at 16:29.
Fuji felt a Threaded cable release was not possible and still have the weather sealing features. Still has the remote programming through the microphone port. But if used then weather sealing will be compromised. Fuji also has a intervalometer programed into the camera. And they now have a new WIFI app that gives camera control for iOS and Android. Same app may work on the X-E2 with a firmware update.
I hear you and I also understand Fuji. It is just that if a digital camera with APSC sensor would give us 24MP at the same IQ as the current XTRANS sensor does, that would not only be perfect for me (and I guess for many others), but also satisfy my needs for MP. While 16MP is good for many occasions, a slightly higher MP count would just do it for me. Maybe it's only me, but this is what I am waiting for.
On the rest I am with you that Fuji is doing almost everything just right with their X system - especially the recently released XE2 and now the XT1. And in a number of cases even better than Olympus, although the Oly cameras are pretty exciting and currently my preferred system - because of lens lineup and IBIS.
Just a repeating law - there is and never was A camera which can do all perfect
Life is an ever changing journey
https://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_...tography/sets/1 Member(s) liked this post
+2 on 16MP. Its time to bring a 24mp sensor into the X-series. I don't want to carry lots of different systems to have a range of capabilities, its time, IMO, for Fuji to bring in a higher resolution model - they're stuck at 16MP. While this is great for most people, it does mean they are excluding those who want to make very large finely detailed prints. Fuji has the lenses....
For those where 16MP is fine, this looks like a lovely camera. A real competitor to the Olympus.
They all effectively have one sensor in common and that, IMO, is too narrow a spread. They have lots of cameras coming very close in terms of their application and utility. While they may have differences in their manner, in niche/role they are very, very close.... just different flavours. The X-T1 just breaks out a little in terms of presentation and some functions, but in essence is another (IMO better) variation.
I think they need to broaden their appeal and this invariably means some flagship models that will not be for the masses. The D800 is not for the masses (that's the D610, if we are talking FF), nor is the 1DX (that's the 6D or 5D III).... or the A7R, but right off the bat Sony was wise enough to produce both the A7 and the A7R. In fact, they were so smart in the distrubution of qualities, that many people bought BOTH.
Fuji is leaving a lot of people out and its not just the people who did will not buy a 16MP camera, its the people who have and will buy a 16MP camera AND want something else with a higher pixel count. They may not be worried about this, but if they want to become the backbone of more pro's kits, they will need to spread their range a little wider IMO.
1 Member(s) liked this post
The whole MP discussion is getting boring - like "we do not need more", "most people are satisfied with 16MP already" etc. etc....
I absolutely agree that in order to stay competitive, Fuji finally needs to show also models with higher MP count - say 24MP. Having a 16MP and a 24MP line is just what is right for ambitious amateurs, pros and most importantly for making good business (as Sony show with the A7 / A7r).
There is absolutely nothing really limiting a great performance from a 24MP XTRANS sensor and if there is, well there can be always a little restriction WRT higher ISO IQ - say Many would be absolutely happy with a bit worse noise and reduced DR above ISO 3200 or 6400, if they get in turn 24MP - as the K3 shows impressively!
So it would be so easy, just let customer have the choice. Instead we are getting - as already mentioned - a number of very similar cameras (almost identical WRT IQ). This may not be the best business model in the end. Fuji has to show that they also can do 24MP in APSC size. The competition (Olympus EM1) is far to close on their heels even with that "crabby" sensor size of m43.
I'm still on the fence, in regards to the MP count. I've had very large prints from 10/12MP Nikon DX/FX bodies that I've been very happy with. As long as you scale properly for the output size and do some test swatches before final printing, it usually works out well. I've also done a lot of painted and textured art reproduction using 10/12MP Nikons for giclée printing without any issues.
Sure, more MP can be nice for cropping after the fact and of course for more resolution. For most of my regular usage, I'm happy within the 12-16MP range. The very odd time I've needed 30-40MP or higher in the past, I've usually rented a Digital Medium Format body or if only 20-30MP was needed, shot actual 6x6/6x7 and had it scanned professionally for usage. Sometimes if it's for translights or background/backdrop stuff and depending on the subject matter and shooting conditions, I've been able to shoot several 10/12MP frames and stitch them together.
I still shoot daytime timelapse regularly with 6 & 10MP Nikon bodies since when you crop and scale for HD Video, it's only really roughly 2MP. Good glass helps those older bodies still work well. For night timelapse and high iso usage, you really do need a newer, higher MP body for the improvements in noise and processing.
I was poking around while things were quiet this afternoon and the Canadian pricing for the X-T1 is great. For once, we aren't being treated like it is still 6-8 years ago with a $1.50 US/CDN Dollar.
At Henry's it's $1,299.99 CDN for body only. No pricing on any lens kits yet. (FUJI X-T1 BODY W/ VERTICAL GRIP (INTRO) 600013401)
And if you pre-order before March 31st, you get the Battery grip itself ($250ish CDN Retail) for free. Some other, smaller Toronto area stores are also offering a free 32GB Sandisk Extreme Class 10 Card with pre-order as well as the battery grip.
Now, I'm really torn as to if I *need* an X-T1 more than just *wanting* one. Decisions, decisions.
I have already pre-ordered at Canada Camera.
No free Mem card though.
With the fluctuation of the Canadian dollar downward, I guess I was excited to get in before Fuji Canada decided to shift cost accordingly.
Glad I didn't get two x-e2 bodies now! One e2 for with wide zoom and one T1 with long zoom, all at the lower weight advantage of the Fuji bodies; excellent.
When I had my back surgery and was given a weight restriction recently, I had to give up my 35mm and MF gear. Thought I would never be happy with mirrorless but was given little choice.
Was I ever wrong. The Fuji X Sensor is ridiculously good. The glass is excellent.
Now I just need a Fuji replacement for my EF 300mm f2.8 IS L monster lens with perhaps a 2x extender and all will be good in the world!
As far as resolution goes, I sold my Epson 9900 and just use my 3800 with K3 inks.
The images from my E2 print beautifully on Colorado Fiber Silk at 17".
I have not had the opportunity to print bigger yet or offset printing.
We can be relatively sure that any top model from Fuji will have a Fuji sensor. Since Fuji don't sell their sensors to others, the production volume is much, much lower than that of Sony, and the price, including development cost, correspondingly higher. This has been the situation since year 2000 (and even before that), when the S1 was introduced, and this is probably the way it will be in the future.
I'm sure Fuji has one or more sensors with higher resolution in development, probably with other features as well (they recently patented a sensor with enlarged green pixels). But Fuji is not participating in any "pixel race'. They never were. Those who need higher resolution now should look elsewhere, but remember that a 24 MP sensor will only give 23% linear size increase compared to 16 MP. One really has to go all the way to 36 MP to see a significant difference.
We're talking about a company that sells millions of sheets of instant film every year, film that results in a final image that is 46 x 62 mm. Those guys know what they are doing and what their market is. One thing is for sure: they don't have to launch anything above 16 MP unless they're sure it represents a quality in solid Fujifilm tradition. If you need more, Velvia is still available in 8 x 10
Total sense Jorgen……I agree wholeheartedly.
As somebody who was a big fan of the film in a green box,
was a huge fan of my Fuji 680III,
still have my S5Pro
and was brought up in the days of twiddling a lens aperture ring,
and a shutter speed dial -
I REALLY like the idea of this new Fuji .......
....... so I'm hoping there will be many naysayers to make me feel better about
recently investing in an EM1 and 12-40
I disagree that one has to go from 16 right up to 36mp to really see a difference. I can see a very significant difference (it is not remotely subtle) between my 12 MP X100 and 22 MP 5D III in fine detail and that's a significantly smaller linear growth ratio than 16 to 36. Then there is tonality and that sense of 'photoreality'.
The only myth here is that additional MP, mated to the right lenses, don't really make much difference. When you are making large prints with fine detail, it makes on heck of a different (with lenses that can do the higher resolving sensor justice).
The same argument abounded with 'there's no point in shooting 645 instead of 35mm... you have to go to 6x7 to see a real difference' and '645 and 6x7 are basically the same quality, so you might as well shoot 645'... 5x4 is so close to 5x7 that why bother with the larger format? It wasn't true then and it isn't true now. Small differences make a small difference (not 'no real' difference) and big differences make a bigger difference than small differences!
16 MP cameras are capable of great things, but all that was being said by me and other people is that it would be nice to have an option of 'a little more'. I've bought into the Sony A7/A7R system, so it does not matter for me (and I am therefore glad I did, seeing as Fuji is stuck at 16MP), but I'd love to see them stretch things a bit further IQ-wise. There are lot of people out there who want to see this.
As for those who say that DR suffers, well the Sony sensor on the A7R and D800 manage just fine!
The Mpixel race. Downsampling the light waves to sound waves. Will it allways be better to sample the sound with two microphones contra one microphone ? It is allways the quality of the mic that do the job. Back to the light waves - Nikon D4 or Fuji only 16 Mpix, but god in sampling.
@turtle - "As for those who say that DR suffers, well the Sony sensor on the A7R and D800 manage just fine!"
Yes, the sensor of the A7R and D800 "manages just fine" because it's a FullFrame sensor, not an APS-C sensor. That's one of the advantages of going FF- you can increase that resolution and keep the sensor image quality parameters good.
Keep in mind Fuji without the AA filter approaches 24 MP of the Sony A7 more than it wouldn't. The 16MP sensor of the K-5/K-5ii/D7000 and possibly the very Fuji Xtrans sensor (just different CFA array) is phenomenal on all aspects of image quality. Crank that up, and you lose something.
Sure, this is better for the landscape photographer. Well then, go full frame. I like that Fuji seems from the get go what vision they have for the XSystem and are pursuing it accordingly instead of just going by a mindless "bigger is better" mentality.
16MP Xtrans already gives a lot for a wide range. It delivers better quality than anything micro four thirds has. 24 MP will come in time, but I don't see any issues with them having stuck to 16MP right now because 16MP delivers for a wide range of photography from the entry level all the way to the professional level. Quality pixels any day over 24m MP diminished.
As Penson mentions- a very expensive Nikon D4 is 16MP. Why? And why does it sells *to professionals*?
How many of you in honest truth are regularly making prints bigger than 13''x19'' and this Fuji can even print higher well.
A 24MP model will come when it's ready. I stand by Fuji in their photographer oriented choice.
An X-M1 would be a better match than this for many street life applications, this one would be a better match to all around weather assignments, weddings, etc. And how they respond and operate is quite different. These are hardly "just different flavors" just because they share a sensor (and the RAWS are different- the XT1, XE-2 have 14 bit RAW vs 12 bit of the XM1, XE1, Xpro 1).
As a quick mental experiment: imagine two XT1's - one 16MP and one 24MP but the rest- the responsiveness, ergonomics, color, etc. was identical. Are they really different just because the different resolution int he sensor? They are almost identical.
Looks like another great camera.
No, I'll not be drinking the Kool Aid. Between the Olympus E-M1 and my Olympus/Panasonic-Leica lenses for it, and the Sony A7 and my Leica R lenses for it, I'm done. =8^o
Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream1 Member(s) liked this post
I have shot many times 24MP in parallel to my 16MP cameras and I ALWAYS see the difference in larger image size, resolution and thus more possibilities for cropping etc. And I must say, that I usually never found DR to be an issue of the 24MP APSC sensors.
Also true, 36MP are fantastic if on the right FF camera - I can speak for the D800E here, but from what I have seen the A7r is similar, if not even better WRT IQ.
All what is said and keep repeating to say is, that some people, including myself, would have been happy to see a 24MP sensor from Fuji - as this is not now in the XT1, hopefully the XPro2 will have that! And actually - for me the 16MP "restriction" of the XT1 will most likely be the deal braker. I already own the EM1 which is a fantastic camera based on a fantastic lens lineup, with even more fantastic lenses coming in the future. And this Oly system is currently my GO TO system for travel, action, wildlive, street, portrait - almost everything. And I really like size and weight.
The one thing which would have make me move completely into the Fuji camp would have been a 24MP XT1 with similar IQ as the current XTRANS sensor. The Fuji lenses are stellar - dare I say to my eyes even better than the Oly lenses currently available for m43 (with exception of the 12-40), the size of camera and lenses is still pretty small and they also offer this nice aperture rings. So all would have been perfect for me if only 24MP.
Why? because for me 24MP is the sweet spot in photography today IMHO. Just enough resolution in combination with still not too large file sizes. Same as for others it is 16MP. So why not just accept instead of trying to convince that 16MP are enough? And I am pretty sure that soon 24MP will be the quasi standard for APSC sensors and I am also pretty sure that all the current naysayers will then suddenly see these 24MP as what they need, must have and being the absolutely greatest.
No matter that XT1 is 16MP, this means I will just stay with my m43 system plus use the wonderful XE2 as my P&S and in parallel work with FF for now if I want and need higher resolution. This is the Nikon system based on the D800E and maybe in near future a A7 or A7r in order to be able to use my M lenses on FF and if it becomes available and depending on the sensor and IQ the A99 successor in order to be able to use that wonderful FF Zeiss A mount lenses again.
Life is just wonderful, no matter if XT1 is 16 or 24MP
Or, I could just really go in with both feet and buy an A7r to go along with the A7
I really want to drink the green kool-aid, but until I sell off my blue kool-aid I can't pre-order. Somebody please buy my kit!
I'm seriously tempted BUT if I don't want FF what's wrong with my lovely m43 kit, and if I do, well the Fuji ain't it!
This is a conditional decision
Just this guy you know
I'm really interested in this camera as a travel/street shooter. My question is how good are the Fuji lenses? My only experience with Fuji optics on digital camera is the H lenses for the Hasselblad. Those lenses are very sharp but lack character except for the 100 F/2.2
Also I hear Fuji has excellent colors but rarely any opinion of skin tones.
You beat me to it, Dale. I took delivery of a pristine CV 58/1.4 SL yesterday, but am waiting for an adapter. found one, but will take a week or so to get here. I will post images as soon as it does.
Re. skin tones: this is Fuji's strongest suit, in my experience (S5 Pro, X-100, X-E1).
If I pixel peep, I can clearly see a difference between 16 and 24 MP too. But if I print two photos of the same motive, one from a 16 MP and one from a 24 MP camera, mix them around so I don't know which is which, hang one on the wall and watch it from a normal viewing distance, take it down, wait 15 minutes, hang the other one on the wall and watch that one from the same distance, will I see which is which? Not in my experience.
These high numbers look so impressive, but remember that going from 16 to 24 MP corresponds to going from 4 to 6 MP, or 8 to 12. If one needs 16 MP to print A2 format (594 x 420 mm) with a satisfactory result, 32 MP is needed to print A1 (840 x 594 mm) with the same resolution. Now, that isn't 100% true either, since the larger format would give a slightly longer view distance, which means that less resolution is needed, so one could print a bit larger again, but that would give an inferior result for pixel peepers
But following a similar logic, going form 16 to 24 MP is in reality less than going from 4 to 6, since 4 MP wasn't really enough to print satisfactory A3 (420 x 297 mm) prints, which is the largest format most amateurs can do, while 6 MP worked fine with that format. 16 MP of course, works fine with A2+, so cover most bases for most people.
Last edited by Jorgen Udvang; 30th January 2014 at 16:05.
I honestly don't understand the koolaid comments or the commentary that someone feels like they need to upgrade from an em-1, a Sony or name your good camera here (Nikon, Pentax, whatever). All of these are great cameras and its about tradeoffs and/or you like the new design.
Its like insecurity or looking status or something. The fuji xt1 looks outstanding. So is the camera that matches your needs. I honestly don't get the defensive commentary on non or upgrading.
Hardly phoography anyway ;-)